PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Harsh Bunger, J.
Avtar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Financial Commissioner, Punjab And Others – Respondent
CWP-8092-2025
Decided on : 24-03-2025
JUDGMENT :
Harsh Bunger, J. (Oral) :
Petitioner (Avtar Singh) has filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus for directing the Financial Commissioner, Punjab (respondent No.1) and the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Revenue Officer, District Hoshiarpur (respondent No.2) to initiate/conduct appropriate enquiry and take appropriate action as per law against the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Tanda, District Hoshiarpur (respondent No.3), who has failed to perform his assigned official duties.
1.1 A further prayer has been made for directing respondent No.3 herein to correct the share of land of the petitioner in the Revenue Records, as per Sale Deed dated 27.11.2003 (Annexure P-1).
2. As per the petitioner, he had purchased land measuring 32 Kanal in Village Miani, Sub Tehsil Tanda, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur, vide Sale Deed dated 27.11.2003 (Annexure P-1), from one Ishar Singh son of Nanak Singh. It is stated that out of the aforesaid 32 Kanal of land, the area measuring 16 Kanal-7 Marla was exclusively owned and possessed by said Ishar Singh and the remaining 15 Kanal-13 Marla of area was jointly owned and possessed by Ishar Singh along with other co-sharers.
2.1 It is stated that two co-sharers, namely Amandip Singh and Mandip Singh, had filed an application seeking partition of the aforesaid joint land and the partition proceedings therein were finalized vide order dated 21.11.2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the learned Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Tanda, District Hoshiarpur.
2.2 It transpires that in the said partition proceedings, petitioner's share has been kept joint with other co-sharers in a joint kurah (block) measuring 210 Kanal-17 Marla, whereby petitioner has been given 240 shares, which comes to 12 Kanal of land.
2.3 According to the petitioner, he had purchased 15 Kanal-13 Marla of land out of the joint khewat, from Ishar Singh son of Nanak Singh; as against which, he has been allocated only 12 Kanal of land, and therefore, less land to the extent of 3 Kanal-13 Marla has been given to him.
2.4 It appears that partition order dated 21.11.2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the learned Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Tanda, District Hoshiarpur has further been implemented in the Revenue Records, vide Mutation No.14382.
2.5 Petitioner states that he is an N.R.I. and during one of his visits to India, he noticed the deficiency of land in his share in the Revenue Records and accordingly, he submitted application dated 05.11.2021 (Annexure P-3) before the learned Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, however, no action was taken thereon. Thereafter, petitioner is stated to have served legal notice dated 28.03.2024 (Annexure P-4) upon the Financial Commissioner, Punjab (respondent No.1) and the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Revenue Officer, District Hoshiarpur (respondent No.2), but no action has been taken thereon as well, till date.
3. In the aforementioned circumstances, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court, seeking relief(s) as noticed hereinabove.
4. Heard.
5. As per the own pleaded case of petitioner, he had purchased land measuring 32 Kanal in Village Miani, Sub Tehsil Tanda, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur from one Ishar Singh son of Nanak Singh. Out of the said purchased land, 15 Kanal-13 Marla of area was jointly owned and possessed by Ishar Singh along with other co-sharers; therefore, the petitioner became a co-sharer in the said joint land. Evidently, the aforesaid joint land was subjected to partition proceedings, wherein final order of partition dated 21.11.2019 (Annexure P-2) was passed by the learned Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, wherein petitioner's share has been kept joint with the other co-sharers by carving out a separate kurah (block). The only grievance of the petitioner is that in the said partition proceedings/order, petitione
The court upheld that participation in previous proceedings negates claims of lack of notification due to incorrect address.
The court upheld that consent to partition proceedings precludes claims of violation of natural justice, affirming the legality of the actions taken by revenue authorities.
Judicial review under Article 226 is limited to procedural irregularities; the court does not act as an appellate authority over quasi-judicial decisions unless glaring errors are present.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.